Religion sticks around for a reason

...and it's not really much about reason.

One of the big mistakes complainers against religion make is based in a misinformed anthropology.  Such complainers denigrate people for not taking evidence into account about their religious claims.[1]  But people do not operate this way in the normal go-about activities of their lives.   Occasionally, when people need to, they take care to bring evidence into account for acting.  But it's rare for people in stable situations to always be taking evidence into account.  Most of the time people live according to their default worldview, one formed by habit and a tolerable level of pragmatic success.  No extra thought is expended in examining something that is working "good enough." 

Ultimately, denigrators of religion seem to be making some sort of ethical complaint.  They seem to be saying that people "should" be constantly assessing one's beliefs in terms of what justifies those beliefs.  But this is an overly intellectualistic worldview, and does not actually represent what people empirically do, how they live their lives. 

Furthermore, the denigrator's view is usually that it would be better for people, somehow, if they were committed to this philosophy of constant assessment in life.  But that is anything but clear to me. 

Socrates said something to the effect that the unexamined life is not worth living.  Is that really so?  Maybe that's a mistaken view.  And, at any rate, it's vacuous, since no one completely lives an unexamined life.  People make choices, and they make them on localized evidence, such as when considering what is likely to result in one thing being more advantageous than another.  So, people regularly consider evidence.  Yes, they consider badly, or attend to the wrong information.  But it's still examination.  And such examinations couldn't be all that inadequate, since people survive and operate within greater society, along with others. 

Religion has the advantage of offering a lot of systematic integration in topics normally requiring lots of independent investigation.  Morality, metaphysics, social conventions, case-studies thru its literature, geography, history -- a regular exposure to and participation in a religions life far exceeds what a trip to the mall and evening after evening of watching television has to offer a person of limited means or even poverty-stricken existence.   And even integration is probably over-rated, as most people want a community, and their worldview is really subordinate to the meaning they find in social interaction with others.

o.

REFERENCES

[1] For example, noted new atheist Sam Harris makes these kinds of claims regularly in one form or another, as when he writes, "I know of no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too desirous of evidence in support of their core beliefs" (in his book Letters to a Christian Nation).

People are pattern seeking primates

From The Chicago Tribune:

When asked about climate change, half of Americans recently polled by the Pew Research Center and the American Association for the Advancement of Science said they didn't believe in it. (Nearly all scientists said they did.) And how many of us, when Michael Jackson died, thought yes, of course, he completes the Ed McMahon-Farrah Fawcett trio? Scientists say this is no surprise. We're wired to do this. Our brains are great at solving scientific puzzles -- and to leading us to believe that celebrities live and die under different rules of the universe than the rest of us.[1]

REFERENCES

[image] "Examples Of Kinetic Illusions In Op Art" Popgive blogsite: Funny stuff, Videos, Pictures, Gadgets, Bizarre, and much more (Accessed August 4, 2009)


[1] Trine Tsouderos "Humans often deny science while trying to find meaning in patterns" Chicago Tribune August 4, 2009.

Research on naps nothing to snooze at.

From the New York Times:

Fully one in three adults admit that on any typical day they take a nap, according to a national survey released Wednesday [....] Napping, writes James B. Maas, a Cornell University sleep expert, “should have the status of daily exercise.” Mammals that divide their day between two distinct periods — sleep and wakefulness — are in the minority, according to the National Sleep Foundation, which pointed out on its Web site: “While naps do not necessarily make up for inadequate or poor quality nighttime sleep, a short nap of 20-30 minutes can help to improve mood, alertness and performance.”

Well, I'd like to write a bit more, but I'm feeling a bit...[yawn]...you know...

O.

[image] Business of Life website.

A few calmly considered thoughts about evidence and ethics

One must separate the motivations of people's good behaviors from the logic which entails those behaviors. If one wishes those good behaviors to continue - and here I am using 'good' in the ethical sense - then a reinforcement of those motivating reasons itself is good, no matter the evidential value of those reasons.

Doing the right thing for the wrong reason -- and here I am using 'wrong' in the evidential sense of 'bad reasoning' - is by far the normal activity of people everywhere across this world and thru its history. Indeed, this is the essence of Religion.

Certain kinds of people want others to do the right thing for the right reason (the former 'right' being ethical, the latter 'right' being evidential), but these people live in a fantasy world of idealistic optimism (perhaps a kind of religion in itself); consequently, they are continually disappointed with those around them. Although introducing better evidence and teaching critical thinking skills is desirable when appropriate, a realist about human nature recognizes the social prudence of reinforcing motivations which allow such good behaviors to continue unabated. This is the essence of Pragmatism.

O.

[image] Max Oppenheimer Die Schachpartie 1885-1954

Femella-Redneckius, ecology and courtship rituals of

* Domain: Eukaryota
* Kingdom: Animalia
* Phylum: Chordata
* Class: Mammalia
* Order: Primate
* Family: Hominidae
* Genus: Homo
* Species: Homo Sapien
* Subspecies: Homo sapiens sapiens
* Subsubspecies: femella-redneckius


Description: Femella-Redneckius are usually found inhabiting sparsely populated semi-urban centers. Specifically, they congregate in herds-usually on Friday and Saturday night- around places such as the Dixie Dog hot dog stand, any local bar that serves underage drinkers, field parties, and especially VFW dances. Prime mating time extends from after the bar closes until the early morning hours.

Femella-Redneckius are known for their incredibly low self esteem. Potential mates who exploit this fact are most likely to "score" with femalla-redeckius. Femella-Redneckius are also notorious for their vanity and inability to plan wisely for their future(s). When told from outsiders that their (alleged) looks will not last, they usually respond with derision or feigned apathy. Thus, most end up in less than optimal marriage arrangements, and usually to unreliable partners whom often turn out to be "stealth seeders" for future generations of Femellia-Redneckia. (see also niveus purgamentum puella)


REFERENCES

[image] Oklahoma Star Archives (click image above for larger version) -- Written on the back of the photo "1973, VFW Hall," snapped during the visit to Oklahoma City by a locally appreciated punk band.

[analysis] Special guest writer, David "The Beatnik" Spindle.


O.

Economists: Tall guy = rich guy

Economists take pleasure in coming up with models which defy our moral sense of what should be politically logical. One claim is that tall people should be taxed more on their incomes than short people. Almost everyone has met someone with (mythical) "short-man syndrome", but in capitalist societies, there might be some basis for height-challenged anger:

"A person's height is strongly correlated with his or her income. Judge and Cable (2004) report that "an individual who is 72 in. tall could be expected to earn $5,525 [in 2002 dollars]more per year than someone who is 65 in. tall, even after controlling for gender, weight, and age." Persico, Postlewaite, and Silverman (2004) find similar results and report that "among adult white men in the United States, every additional inch of height as an adult is associated with a 1.8 percent increase in wages." Case and Paxson (2006) write that "For both men and women...an additional inch of height [is] associated with a one to two percent increase in earnings."[1]

Fortunately, I'm just under 6'2", so I'm feeling good about my economic future right now. This table[1] below shows only about 9% of the US can snub their altitudenous noses at me. Odd thing, however, among academics, I've noticed I'm not all that tall. But at the mall or at a football game, I have the better view in a crowd.



REFERENCES

[image] bedrock.deadsquid.com (Accessed 12/16/2007)

[1] N. Gregory Mankiw and Matthew Weinzierl "The Optimal Taxation of Height:A Case Study of Utilitarian Income Redistribution"

[2] Julie Wheldon "Forget Napoleon, taller men have the shorter fuse" Daily Mail March 28, 2007 (Accessed 12/16/2007)

Chimpanzees (and humans) trade for biological "services."

{ Podcast this essay } Seeing this sign reminded me of an article I recently read. Chimpanzee society shares many striking resemblances to human society. Like us, Chimps form complex social bonds, and they do so with symbolic gestures, most notably by means of sharing of prized resources. For example, though chimps will rarely share the wild plant foods which they forage, for strategic social situations they will share prized foods, such as meat or pilfered, cultivated plant foods (from human crops) as a way of reinforcing social bonds and constructing new alliances.

Most of the sharing occurs when adult males make offers to females that are in the proper cycle for reproduction -- for reference, call such females who receive these goods "hotties". Exchanging food for increase of sexual access is certainly in the male's advantage, and may showcase his suitability to sire, given that he has the capability to acquire such goods. Hotties apparently find this a fairly good indicator of male reproductive health. This activity can generalize even beyond primates as an analysis of altruism:

Food sharing has important implications for the evolution of cooperation, offering a means to evaluate the ‘paradox’ of altruism, whereby a recipient gains fitness benefits at the expense of a donor. When individuals control a highly valued resource, they may opt to use that resource as a tool for social bargaining. Thus, even acts that appear altruistic may serve to ultimately enhance one’s own fitness.[1]

What is also interesting in this study is that the sharing of prized resources was not an immediate cost-benefit payoff: "Males shared crops with a maximally swollen female in 16% of sharing events, but were never observed mating with that female immediately after sharing." I would speculate that hotties would be far better off (in terms of expected reproductive benefits) waiting to see if the pattern could be (i.e. would be) maintained over time.

Diamonds (and of course other valued stones) have been assessed by women across history as attractive gifts. It is known that primitive humans were the first mineral collectors of such stones as chert, chalcedony, and obsidian. These were shaped into arrowheads and spear points for hunting. Later in pre-history, humans used turquoise, gold, silver, and copper in religious ceremonies, for spiritual enhancement, and protection from evil. I think a reasonable speculation would be that the symbols of such stone technology could stand for the hunting capability of the man who gave such a symbol to a desired hottie. Throwing a deer carcass at a hottie would not be practical, or perhaps desirable, but bequeathing a symbol (or an actual instance) of the technology that shows clear access to a desirable resource would be a very small step from the meat-sharing behaviors of chimpanzees. (Also, it could be that good hunting technology shows intelligence, and intelligence is what is actually strongly favored by women in modern mate selection.[2]) Modern jewelery exchange seemingly begins as an abstraction of just such a process about 100,000 years ago.[3]

I've been thinking about getting my wife a necklace for Christmas, but I don't want any more children. So perhaps I should just cease this whole line of thinking.

REFERENCES

[1] Hockings KJ, Humle T, Anderson JR, Biro D, Sousa C, et al. (2007) "Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit." PLoS ONE (Accessed 11/22/2007)

[2] Ray Fisman "An Economist Goes to a Bar and solves the mysteries of dating" Slate Magazine 11/7/2007 (Accessed 11/22/2007)

[3] "Researchers Identify What May Be Oldest Known Jewelry" Voice of America 6/22/2006 (Accessed 11/22/2007)


O.

Philosophical Thoughts on Dance

{ Audio this essay @ 1.1MB @ 10min } I remember in grad. school, when I was taking a class on how to be an effective teaching assistant (i.e. a well-behaved slave of the academy), in front of me sat a red-headed girl who was absolutely serious about getting a PhD in dance. On her view, dance was the singularly most important art worthy of study as regards the whole corpus of the humanities. She was of only moderate physical charisma, a bit too short, and way fanatical about dance. I caught myself thinking -- silently, of course, since I didn't want to get my @$$ stomped by a maximally fit, dance-crazed, near-midget -- "It's only dance! It's not a real subject!"

This was all years ago. I was much younger, and of a completely uncultured background; and, as I now understand, dance is a much deeper subject than what passes for said in those pitiful approximations at Junior High school courting rituals, and in those drunken entertainment venues where one finds polished steel poles and platforms dotting the floor area of a too-well carpeted hotel.

Indeed, I still know next to nothing about dance, as a particular fine art, which means I'm in an excellent position to speculate about it with wild abandon.

I was recently in Chicago, and there spent some time picking my way, room by room, through the Chicago Museum of Art. As is well attested: paintings, sculpture, and music all track the philosophical ideas of the era in which they are found. The technology, trends, and fashions of fine arts are an explicit, encarnalized commentary on the thoughts of both the elite and popular-level inhabitants of place and time. All fine art yields a commentary on the status and thinking of the civilization in which it appears; and dance, when performed as fine art, is therefore likewise a commentary on the status and thinking of its owning civilization (or era within a civilization).

On this view, then, in principle one could identify certain commitments and patterns of thought for the sponsoring era via dance. But as a warm up, consider how music yields such commitments. Note, for instance, the Harpsichord with its discrete well-partitioned sound. How convenient that it becomes fully utilized within the Age of Reason,[1] where successful reductionistic patterns of thought yield astounding, even frightening advances in the science of the day. Each discovered fact of the natural world is classified and duly partitioned neatly within the greater order of things, playing its role precisely and identifiably within the grand system of God's great design. The same could be said for each plucked note of the harpsichord within the greater movement of the orchestra, each discrete note playing it's role precisely and identifiably within some masterfully designed Baroque[2] fugue.

Can such a link be found for dance? As a statement of anthropology, dance seems to appear in all cultures and places. As language has been speculated to originate partially with the primate-level grunts, so too dance probably has its cues tied to such a sign vocabulary of physical needs:

Primitive dancers also shared certain gestures and movements, which were drawn from their everyday lives. People planting seeds swing their arms with unvarying regularity. People who are hungry rub a hand on their empty bellies. People who want to show respect or admiration bend down or bow before another individual. These gestures, and others like them, were part of the earliest dances. There is also a large vocabulary of gestures that originated as a means of expressing bodily needs. Caresses are universally taken to signify tender feelings. Clenched fists mean anger. Hopping up and down indicates excitement. Primitive dancers used all of these movements in both their social and religious or magical dances. These dances were not created and performed for entertainment, as many dances are today. One of the major reasons for them was to help tribes survive. Long before the written word could guarantee that traditions would be passed on and respected, it was dance that helped the tribe preserve its continuity.[3]

A step up from basic body motions yields the primitive mindset concerning how the world is taken to operate:

Two sorts of dance evolved as cultures developed: social dances on occasions that celebrated births, commemorated deaths, and marked special events in between; and magical or religious dances to ask the gods to end a famine, to provide rain, or to cure the sick. The medicine men of primitive cultures, whose powers to invoke the assistance of a god were feared and respected, are considered by many to be the first choreographers, or composers of formal dances.[3]

Here I've identified dance as an activity stemming from basic primate/human body motions, but there actually no need to draw the origin even so late. One might very well speak of the stylized pattern of movements performed by any animal, as a bird in courtship display, or an insect, as a honeybee in indicating a source of nectar. If dance capitalizes on the most basic patterns of body motion, then even mammalian patterns of flight, fight, etc. might have their own readily available kinsetic primitives: the wince of retreat at on-coming fast objects; the reflexive-withdrawal at being poked or stung; the coordinate movement of social mammals as a group -- all of these would predate even primate innate motions.

There might even be brain-level morphology structures which would hint at basic motor control and muscle function for movements. Each morphological hint might appear at some discernible layer of the folds within the human brain -- an organ developed from our common biological heritage with other animals. (Anciently formed, more primitive structures would appear in the middle of the brain, with more recent expansions toward the front and top.)[4]

As a statement about the human range of motion and vocabulary of standardized animal movements, one is tempted to posit a "deep grammar" of motion which dance, whether by default or by plan, tacitly acknowledges. The notion of deep grammar comes from the field of linguistics, where the best known theory is that of Noam Chomsky:

Developed to explain the ease with which children learn a language, and adults produce correct sentences, the theory envisages a common underlying structure to all languages, and a complex set of rules to generate individual utterances. [...] [O]ur astonishing creativity with words, and the phenomenal ease with which children learn a language, meant that language users employed and intuitively recognized an underlying structure. Not a structure, moreover, resting on phonemes or individual words ... but a sort of fundamental, proto-syntax[5]

Lessons along this line seem present in an area closely related to dance -- namely, martial arts. As a popular example, consider the view of Bruce Lee, who argued that all martial arts must reckon with the limits and natural physics of the human body. Given such limits, there is really not a single martial arts style that can be named as superior to another, for they all operate under the same parameters: those of the human form. Here, then, one might posit a proto-syntax of human physiology. In Lee's own words,

"There is only one type of body, 2 arms, 2 legs, etc that make up the human body. Therefore, there can only be one style of fighting. If the other guy had 4 arms and 2 legs, there might have to be a different one. Forget the belief that one style is better than the other...."[6]

Recently I ran across a video which got me thinking seriously about the whole notion of dance; or, perhaps I should say it got me re-thinking about the notion, and this time with some seriousness.

What does this dance video tell us about the philosophical ideas of today? The music is some short of hybrid between what (I believe) is called industrial and electronica. The clothing of the "dancers", if that's what they are best called, is distinctly synthetic and accentedly contemporary. It's hard to describe the movements, but computationally reductionistic would be the first phrase that comes to mind. What natural, even movement there is within the video occurs at the very end when the friends enter to recover their compatriot. Again, I know little about dance, and nothing about choreography, but I suspect that since each dancer's actions are compiled individually from a database of dance and sound tracks, someone might very well read the trajectory of how dance is modified by the dominance of standardized information templates. Windows, for example, forces the user to operated within certain pre-defined motifs, and here we see the virtual dance moves also mandated by pre-defined motifs.

Wittgenstein, the most celebrated 20th century philosopher, complained about the classical music of his time that it was dominated by the machine, and so much so that he could not bear to listen to it. As Wittgenstein said to a friend: "Music came to a full stop with Brahms; and even in Brahms I can begin to hear the sound of machinery."[7]

Perhaps aficionados of modern dance would find the wholesale embrace of the computer a likewise disconcerting development. I couldn't really say if such a disconcerted attitude would be justified; since, as my mantra has been throughout this essay, I know very little about dance.


REFERENCES

[1] History of the Harpsichord

[2] Baroque Music Defined

[3] The History of Dance

[4] On mammal to human brain development:

4.1. Diagram: Basic plan of the animal brain:

4.2. Diagram: Sketch of human brain compared to other animal brains:

4.3. Diagram: Time scale chart of brain development parallel to other animals:

[5] C. John Holcombe "Chomskian Linguistics" textetc.com

[6] "Bruce Lee" Wikiquote

[7] Béla Szabados "Wittgenstein the Musical: Notes toward an Appreciation"

[video] UNIQLO MIXPLAY You Tube.


O.